Hi - i've just bought an LG 42LE4500 which is a LED tv. We previously had a LG37 LD450 which is an LCD and whilst im impressed with the jump in size, i dont think the picture looks as natural and can be a bit hazy/blurry when it moves, especially on sport.

Is this due to the increase in size or is it because I've gone for an LED tv. I understood LED's were better quality but not so sure now. Would the 42 LD450 have been a better option, or 42 LD490? These are LCD's. It's a bit disappointing as we really wanted a bigger size but the blurryness is annoying me and everything seems to look American, even regional news/Corrie lol.

I don't know about the blur, but LEDs are not better quality than LCDs. LEDs are just LCD TVs with different backlights (which result in poor uniformity, bleeding and have blue/grey patches to dark scenes) and are slimmer (which result in poor sound).

LCDs use CCFL backlights as opposed to LCD LEDs which use LED backlighting or edge-lit backlights. I prefer LCDs which use CCFL (non-LED TVs) as I find they're better quality in both sound and picture.

You have an LCD telly. The LEDs are used for the backlight. They don't actually make the image you see on screen.

Anyway one thing I found with my LG telly is that all the dynamic processing options it has only serve to screw up the picture. The first thing I did was turn them all off. That would be the first thing I would try.

On my set these controls are found in the Picture settings menu scrolling down to the bottom and selecting advanced. Not sure if your model is similar. But basically on my TV the dynamic this that and the other did nothing to improve the picture and it looks all the better for having them set to OFF.

Another one bitten by marketing.

LED is not magic, it is not a new display technology, it is a backlight. The most important factor for a good screen is the lcd it itself, ipad screen is better than many of its competitors not because it has led, but because it has an ips lcd display panel. There are different lcd panel tech out there, and the cheap = crap. Backlights are a tiny factor in the quality game, some of the best screens and highly color accurate screens out there for photographers and graphic artists were fluorescent backlight based..

Cheap led tv can just be some low end panel they shove an led backlight on and charge a 10% premium on, it is a big joke. Some of the worst netbook displays are led even.

The difference between 37 and 42 shoudlnt' result in a blur. Maybe you have it hooked up wrong. How do people with 50" get by if such a size difference results in blur...

Thanks for the suggestion, definitely tried this and works to a point, wondering if i should've gone for the back-lit model. Some programmes look brilliant but others not so good, hmmm.

All lcd tv is backlit, that is the point.

People mod old computer monitors into projector screens by ripping them apart and lighting them through a lamp and overhead projection system even. All lcd work the same, they are lit by a light shining through the back, it is why it is so hard to get deep black, the screen has to try to block a bright backlight.

http://revision3.com/tbhs/charge/#rev3Player
part 3 he ghetto mods a dead lcd...with a regular bulb to show you

Sorry i didnt word that very well, i do understand the difference between LED and LCD, just wondering if the LCD would've been a better purchase than the LED equivalent, the thickness of the sceen i can live with if LCD is better, same as the tinny sound if LED is as i have a 5.1 setup. It would be good if i could see them both next to each other with an SD freeview picture going through them both so i can compare/contrast at the most basic.

Again, you cannot say..generalizations do not work. There are several lcd panel technologies and each has nothing to do with the backlight, furthermore each manufacturer has differences in quality/tech of each type of panel, so the differences in quality are many. You have to judge each screen individually on its own merits. Gross generalization gets you into trouble, like with buyin an "led" tv and getting sold a sh*t panel.

Kind of old article but it explains some fundamental technology differences that are still relevant.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/mon...lcd-guide.html
Esp the part on matrices
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/mon...arameters.html
And another with more up to date list of matrices
http://www.avforums.com/forums/lcd-l...ls-placed.html
As you can see lcd is not lcd, there are many different types, but to dumb it down, for the consumer they just say lcd, or led, and tack on a premium for the later.

There are good led technologies, grid array of red greed blue "rgb" led has great potential...but it is expensive. Regular led tv's these days however use cheap white leds...edge lit..and totally different.

You just have to find some decent reviews where they test calibrated tv's and don't rely on the manufacturers bullsh*t specifications. Stuff like contrast ratios on tv's are pretty much lies.

Go to avsforum or avforums and look up info on tv's.

Proabably should have got a plasma ....
for the more natural picture

"and can be a bit hazy/blurry when it moves, especially on sport."
A well known feature of most LCDs
Not sure why you think the backlight technology would affect this

I bought an LG 42LE4500 about just over a month ago now and have found that playing around with the Picture setting will definetly help, like chrisjr said make sure Dynamic Picture processing is turned off, I found aswell that it does the picture no favours being turned on, other than that I think this is a pretty decent TV, also another thing is to have a search Online and see what other people have there settings at.

Thanks, the reason I thought the backlight technology might affect this is because i have the 37 backlit LCD and this is very smooth and natural.

Strange that you say about sound, I think you are right. My plasma is pretty thick compared to a lot of T.V/s around now and the sound is really good, nice bass and really clear. My next door neighbours new LCd Samsung seems to have very little bass, even mucking about with the EQ makes little difference. Now a mate of mine got a Samsung LED set a few months back, that got even worse sound than the LCD set. Makes no difference to him as it all goes though a 5.1 system anyway.

All this electronic bass boost and other sound altering systems seems to make things worse.

The next T.v i buy I am certainly going to check the sound on it, but I am considering getting a new 5.1 system that will work with my PS3 and my HD box. My old cheapo 5.1 will not put out in 5.1 as it is only Dolby pro-logic

i love my plasma, just a shame it uses 250watts in power, but I still think the picture quality is better than a new LCD or LED t.V

It seems like Plasmas are still being produced, so when my t.v goes belly up, hopefully they will still be around then.

250 watts is nothing, but yes, a large plasma will average around that, they are getting lower each year though.

You just can't good sound in a box hat thin, if you ever look at the speakers in tv's they are thin oval type speakers that shoot out the bottom or the back of the tv. The thinner the worse. They pretty much expect you to get a sound bar now. The whole point of led is you can get super thin I guess, and at a certain point, I think they can only get a laptop driver in the gap...

fair enough, but likely to be due differrent panel or cheaper electronics ( a newer set will (generaly) be cost reduced intenally compared to a previous model )

It's so frustrating as they're both LG but one looks very natural, especially when moving, the other looks all hazy and American. I'm probably being a bit fussy, to be fair - the increase in size makes the great look brilliant, and the bad look terrible!

A mate of mine is a sound engineer and owns his own small studio, he is also a songwriter and singer and even he was impressed with the quality of the audio from my T.V

He was even more impressed when I showed him HD from Blu-ray